report was reviewed by the attorney general. it was reviewed by the time up career people in the justice department, and they clearly defended it when the president's lawyers wrote to dispute some of it and, you know, one of the things that's interesting to me he is going to, you've seen a parade of cabinet officials, people around the president, democrats come out and talk about their interactions with joe biden saying he's very new, said he's very in command, he's on top of things. we haven't seen anything like that from merrick garland, the attorney general, and i doubt you will. it's just not his style, but i think people around the president i didn't have noticed that and i think that the fact that again the justice department has not distance itself from this report, i think speaks loud volumes that they stand by the work of rob hur >> alright, evan perez, thank you very much. we know you'll be in the hearing room. you'll get some of the flavor from inside there. it'll be very interesting do you see all of this plays out, evan, thanks so much and paula, in case you're both of them out here on the

canvas, cannon office building balcony, it's interesting spot over lucky it's beautiful out here and i thought was really a lot colder. thought was going to get code. >> it might be a little >> chilly at times in this hearing room. as we were pointing out in the beginning of this both democrats and republicans are a little upset about how all this played out. obviously, republicans wanted to see the president indicted over this, but democrats initially thought her might not take these kinds of shots that they think he did and it appears he did in this report, but paul, i mean, you have a draft of some of these statements that her is going to make. what stands out to you. >> i just spoke with this source close to rob hur and it's interesting, he's walking in. i'm told a width the viewpoint that he's not looking to make anyone happy, which is probably pretty good because we know everyone is unhappy with the rubber for one reason or another. but he has prepared for this. interestingly, he left the justice department last week, but before he left the office of legislative affairs actually helped him prepare for this. now they didn't tell him what to say, but helped it's been prepare

for this. now he knows he's gonna get questions from democrats who are furious about the comments he made about president biden's memory. but as we see in this opening statement, he said, look, i had to quote, show my work now we also know republicans are going to be mad at him because he didn't charge biden, right? they're gonna make the comparison with trump. i'm told that i'm going to remind them that he did not find biden innocent, but did not believe that he could win at trial. and he believes her believes that if everybody is mad at you you did your job as special counsel >> yeah. but you know, >> kasie, you know, lots of things should be pointed out here, i suppose. first of all we have to say this for the tenant thousands of time that biden when asked for the documents, they got the documents back to the government when trump was asked for the documents, lots of other things happen that did not play out kasie urinary official read when you hear some of these new excerpts coming out, especially, i mean, i thought that was fascinating you know, the detail that evan perez was talking about this exchange over bo biden the day that he died. it does not sound the way it was initially

portrayed as evan outlined and, you know, we have this transcript five hours, right. so it's enormous. right? we printed it out i probably killed too many trees doing that, but i'm going to sit here and go through it. >> but but what i have managed to >> glean from it and evan touched on this, was this didn't come across as though it was a present but in under duress, who was being grilled on details that he could not come up with. this was someone who was having >> and we've seen biden do >> this in public. if you ever ever with them in private, he doesn't in private to write. he has these kind of freewheeling conversation joking discussions. that's what was going on here. and i think for the biden team, i mean, my big question is go it goes back to that press conference that the president had when this first came out where he was clearly angry, clearly wanted to go and do that, but had he not what do we have been more focused on the substance of what's it's in here, which is that they ultimately didn't charge him. and it is worth, i think, especially in light of that

incredible exclusive that our colleagues kaitlan collins and poland's had, where you have a trump, one of the trump employees in that indictment talking about moving talking about essentially what was the cover up, right? i think the clearest contrast here between the biden and trump cases around classified material is, what did they do once it was discovered? right. >> and i >> think that's what you're going to hear from the white house. his name out. what is it typical rapid response style operation for any white house or, or political campaign, i guess depending on your circumstances, would be to try to push back on just things today? >> yeah. >> when this bombshell was dropped me that much was made of robert hur saying that, you know, biden comes across as an elderly man with a core memory that enraged democrats but now democrats are sort of walking around with a spring in their step after the president had that performance up on capitol hill, where he sort of dad yelled at the republicans for over an hour they work or get kinda it's a term i'm familiar with, but anyway, was very

feisty. in contrast with how robert hur describe the president during their exchange. but the other thing that stands out in her report is her was careful to explain that the biden case does differ from the trump case. he talks about that in the the case as well as somebody that democrats did not seize on because there were so upset about the stuff about his memory. >> exactly. he had to do this. he had to address and it doesn't have any legal way why former president trump? i was being charged, but he's opting not to charge and president biden and he talks about what are called aggravating factors, right? >> a very blurry or leeward. all >> you found some classified documents, then what did you do? with biden? they reported them. right? they went through the exact chain of command to get those back to where they belonged they consented to searches and then allowed biden to do a voluntary interview. whereas former president trump not only did he refuse to give the documents back for months, he allegedly tried to obstruct efforts to get them back. so that's how he describes the difference think there's also differences in the volume of material that we're talking about. but he doesn't get as

into that in his report, but it's something he absolutely had to address and it's something that's going to come up again, repeating diddly today. >> and one has to think that during this hearing what we're going to hear from democrats time and again, are these differences between the biden case in the trump case, i mean, they're going let's spend time laying that out. i think throughout this proceeding kasie hunt, paula reid, stay with us. i want to go back to wolf blitzer. i know wolf. you have a panel of folks to talk to about all of this as well. but this is going to be fascinating to watch. i mean it's not often where we see sort of an equal grilling from both sides. i mean, robert hur might say, well, yeah, as paula reid was saying a few moments ago, wolf. ok, that shows that i did my job right? i think both sides of the aisle would probably disagree with that but wolf also that back to you, this is going to be a very, very lively hearing. jim, as you know, take a look at the makeup. the chairman of the house judiciary committee, jim jordan. it's going to be very, very lively. let me start with jamie gangel what do you think the republicans are up to get

going into this hearing this morning? >> no question. we're going to see fireworks today. we're going to hear them talk about his memory. we're going to see go to the point, as jim mentioned, that he was not charged. why wasn't he charged? they'll make as much political hayes they can. the democrats are going to try to make their points about how he's different from for trump but i just want to say i think the most fascinating thing coming out today will be this transcript, because as you leave through it, you see joe biden as joe biden. >> there are >> digressions. he talks about how we wanted to be an architect he makes noises about car noises about his cars and, you get the sense of who he is at the same time. >> they're there are >> these memory issues, but they're more nuanced when you read the transcript from a legal perspective, laura, do

you expect any new major legal ground to be broken today? >> oh, i want to kind of a dramatic reading. i will not be satisfied until i hear this transcript come to life through the eyes of somebody who was there to witness it. i mean, words on a page or one thing, they can be missed construed the tone is always going to be important. contexts is going to be very, very key here. i want to hear exactly how the president was actually saying things. what was the climate like in the room in terms of how it was being received, did her have immediate misgivings about the nature of his memory issues? were there in fact, memory issues or simply turn of phrases that met led him to believe that he was not going to be precise in his testimony or that he couldn't convince a jury as a lawyer, i want to know is this witness going to get me where i need to be? to meet my burden of proof. are you going to be able to convey that there is actual criminal conduct of foot or are you going to beam as he described as sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory, who i cannot assign nefarious actual motives to. that's

really important here. and also important. i want to find out about is just how far deep he goes. it's into the idea of the distinction between the conduct of what mike pence, for example, of donald trump, and of course, joe biden, because this is all about what you intended to do here. you can't simply pull the okeydoke on these well-seasoned prosecutors suggest. oh, wear their national security issues in these boxes. i had no idea he would have to have clear and convincing evidence to suggest that. i don't have enough to run on to go on and why he said, even if he were not running for office, if you didn't have this doj memo of a sitting president, i still wouldn't have prosecuted them. that's a very important point, right? >> we're showing our viewers david live pictures of the hearing room with chairman jim jordan will gavel this in momentarily. we're told and then rob hur, who is now the former special counsel, he retired from the justice department just a few days ago, is now testifying as a private citizen, but walk us through

the political impact potentially of what we're about to see. >> well, listen, there is much in this testimony today that is going to frame this presidential election that we are in. it deals with some of donald trump's legal problems that he's facing, such as his own documents case. that's gonna be front and center today. obviously, one of the big vulnerabilities for trump but the big vulnerabilities for biden is the issue of his age, and that's clearly going to be on display today, even though his performance last week in the state of the union gave democrats a sigh of relief. that energetic performance here, it shows us this issue is never going away from now through eight months or now. it's something that's going to have to be encountered every day by the biden campaign perhaps not always in a spotlight like this, but clearly it will be today. and i would just note laura was saying no doubt the democrats are going to be eager to show the difference between the biden case and the trump case here. in fact, the different conclusions already on display by the prosecutors. one came to all your questions and said, no, this way and this is not

going to help me get across the finish line. i'm not going to pursue charges. jack smith, obviously felt he had evidence that required him to pursue charges what i what i think is an important understanding is that donald trump, if you look at a social media this morning, also seems eager to have this difference of the trump case and the biden gets on his plate because he feels it's this too tier justice system. why does joe biden not have charges? and i do aren't being treated differently. can wants to ignore the fact that the facts are quite different here. but he too is eager to sort of put the contrast on display for very different reasons. then we'll see from the democrats today, which i think is intriguing and worth noting as well. >> it's gonna be, as i said, a very, very exciting, lively hearing to be sure elliot williams, what specifically are you going to be looking for now that we've all read his opening, rob hur's opening draft statement. >> a few things. number one, now, taking on the point as to why he's why he resigned from the justice department in the first place. that's that's sort of common. why justifying now it's that's my private citizen,

john durham, the last special counsel did so for a big reason, it allows him to bring in his own private counsel in a way he could not if he were still justice justice department attorney. so he sort of gets to speak as mind here. so a few things jumped out to me from his opening statement. number one, here, he talks about the independence and how they are separate from the justice department and not not reporting to the attorney general. talked about accuracy and fairness and sort of boring justice department and prosecutor buzzwords that everybody says and nobody believes. but the big one he really does take on the memory point almost recognizing that this was going to be a central point at the hearing. it is, but one of hundreds of pages of that one point in the hundreds and pages of his report, but he chose to latch on to that, devotes a few paragraphs is saying the president chose to make his memory and issue here here, i think he's just trying to preempt and anticipating that it's going to be the source of a lot of questioning and more to the point he seemed to make an issue of the president's memory because that largely was the reason why at

least according to the report, they did not choose charge the president because they felt that the president's ability to testify as a witness would have been compromised because he couldn't have they couldn't have established a crime. i think it's important for all of us to step back and not fixate on this president's memory issue and focus more on the point that they did not think they had a provable crime, whenever the basis was and whatever the reasons are, when a prosecutor doesn't think they can charge someone with a crime and when they don't bring charges, and i think a lot of this political noise has clouded the way people have approached this report. >> a great point, especially elliott, because even if they had never interviewed the president of the united states, joe biden if they had corroboration to suggest that he in fact, knew he was committing a crime or was committing a crime. that's one key distinction between the trump line of cases and the mar-a-lago case. and of course this one and that you've got corroboration mean kaitlan collins had a great interview yesterday with trump employee number five with an eye and ear

witness talking about what was happening, even if they themselves were oblivious to contents they say of those box, boxes. so you had the idea of the absence of that here that would have been part of the consideration of this special counsel because when you have somebody who was committed he's a crime. you normally do not bring that person if it's a criminal context before the grand jury, you get everyone around them to figure out what they have done, build your case, and then it's time you hear from them is if they want to take the stand in their own defense another important point on that council is so much of this is about trump versus biden. how do you compare? the conduct of donald trump versus the conduct of john of joe biden, which naturally makes it into a political fight. the better comparison is mike pence, another individual who was found with sensitive documents in his home, but behaved a similar manner to president biden by number one, identifying that he had the materials in his home number to immediately calling one enforcement in number three, getting them the hell out of his house. once he realized he had them, this whole idea that this becomes a binary trump versus biden, i think sort of

mrs. the point where everybody hold your thoughts. >> we have a lot more to discuss and we will doing there you see the chairman of the house judiciary committee, jim jordan is now in the room. we expect this hearing to begin momentarily. we'll of course they have live coverage. sure. all of you are access especially to hear rob hur's opening statement. i've read it already very, very interesting. indeed, we're watching very closely, just want to point out one thing, rob hur's folks say he resigned as the special counsel a few days ago because the investigation has been completed and there was no longer any need for a special counsel, and we always and we all know the results of his investigation. want to go back to my colleague, jim acosta is up on capitol hill. jim >> yeah, wolf, that's right. it is worth pointing out to our viewers, robert hur, now a private citizen testifying before the house, and you could see just a few moments ago is wolf was pointing out

paula reid and i do want to read just a portion of the her opening that was up two with respect to these classified documents. and if we have, we can show it to our viewers. says these going to say this in just a few moments. my task was to determine whether the president retained or disclosed national defense information willfully, meaning knowingly, and with the intent to do something the law for bids i could not make that determination without assessing the president's state of mind for that reason, i had to consider the president's memory and overall mentioned so state and howard jury likely would perceive his memory and mental state in a criminal trial paul, i mean, much has been made and i suppose democrats are going to seize on this and want to talk about this. i suppose republicans will take some, some shots perhaps at this as well. you know wondering why her put this in there to begin with. why did it need to be in there? >> well, he said he had to do it. he had to lay out his reasoning as a prosecutor. he said as a prosecutor, these are the kinds of considerations that you must make. he says in the first few lines of his

executive summary, he says, are investigation uncovered evidence that president biden willfully retained pained, and disclosed classified materials, and then he has to go through the steps to assess the strength of his case. can i prove this beyond a reasonable doubt? and these comments about his memory well, i know that they aggravate the white house. this was how he viewed the case, not strong enough to bring because he couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. and i'm totally from a source very close to her that they believe one of the reasons that the transcript was released today by the white house is because the white house is probably concerned that additional damaging information could come out under questioning. but i'm also cautioned that her hopes to not really reveal too much more new information and stay within the contours of his report. >> yeah. kasie just some final thoughts from you before we get started here because we're going to get going at any moment. but the fact that this was included in this report at the time that it was when there were these questions that were being raised about the president's fitness and so on i mean, the president addressed

a lot of that during the state of the union speech. so i mean, this is they're going to go back and forth over this issue. but in the minds of a lot of americans, this may have been resolved. maybe not everybody, but to some extent, during the state of the union. >> well, the white house caught a break with the timing here. yes. is happening after the state of the union. >> and look, i think that from a political >> perspective, you have to remember that the thing that is the most damaging to the president in terms of how his age impacts voters. is this idea that it means that he is a weak leader. >> it's not necessarily about his >> health or his sharpness is he strong enough, right. >> and so >> that is the theme that i'm looking for from republicans on this committee. let's also take a step back and remember for that we are living in just incredibly divisive and polarized times, right? i mean, these are not a typical up political times and you're going to see that from jim jordan at the dais here today >> yeah. >> i don't mean to interrupt but we should note one of the things that we're hearing right now that is taking place

in the hearing room. is that there are protesters then the hearing room, as we speak, it might be delaying things just to touch it looks like there's a bit of a back-and-forth should be listening for just a moment just to see what is being said. let's, let's listen just a moment just to see what's happening here. >> java right last for five finding, genocide. look at these pictures. >> these are real thursday special counsel, the former special counsel, robert hur, and coming into testify, he's going to be taking a seat in just a few moments but as we're seeing on the right side of the screen, there are some protesters. they appear to be with the organization code

pink, which is an anti-war organization. and as you were hearing some of the sound in the hearing room, just a few moments ago, it sounded as though they were making reference to there's to the war with the hearing has gaveled in. let's go to the hearing now in the report of special counsel, robert hur, the chair now recognizes the gentleman from the state of wisconsin for the purpose of leading us in the pledge pursuant to an agreement with the ranking member, nadler and without objection, chairman comer and ranking member raskin will be permitted to participate in today's hearing for the purposes of making opening statements and asking questions of the witness they

each will receive three minutes for an opening statement and five minutes to question the witness. the chair now recognizes himself for an opening statement. robert hur was appointed special counsel on january 12, 2023 he had a fundamental question to address. did joe biden unlawfully retained classified information? the answer, yes, he did page one of mr. hur's report, he says this our investigation uncovered evidence that president biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen he further writes, mr. biden willfully retained marked classified documents about afghanistan, and handwritten notes in his notebooks which he stored in unsecured places in his home joe biden kept classified information and joe biden failed to store classified information properly mr. hur made these

determinations after interviewing 147 witnesses he examined 7 million documents, including emails, text messages, photographs, videos, toal records, and other materials from both classified and unclassified sources but there's more he not only joe biden not only kept information, he wasn't allowed to keep, and he not only failed to secure that information properly. he also shared it with people. he wasn't allowed to the who weren't allowed to see it shared that information with his ghostwriter and remember, this is information that only individuals with the security clearance are supposed to see mr. hur told us on page 200 of his report that it's the kind of information that quote, risk serious damage to america's national security and what a joe biden had to say about all this what was his explanation on page 94, mr.

hur's report? joe biden said he took his notebooks with him after his vice presidency because quote, they're mine. and every president before me has done the same exact thing. never mind the fact that he had never been president when he took this information but what comes through is joe biden felt he was entitled, you can almost hear it. you can feel the arrogance in the statement. >> their mind but even with all that mr. hur chose not to bring charges because quote mr. biden would likely present himself to a jury as he did in our interview of him as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory a forgetful old man who mr. hur said did not remember when he was vice president for getting on the first day of the interview, when his teeth when his term ended, and for getting on the second day of the interview, when his term as

vice president began mr. her produced a 345 page report. but in the end, it boils down to a few key facts. joe biden kept classified information joe biden failed to properly secure classified information. and joe biden shared classified information with people. he wasn't supposed to joe biden broke the law. >> but because he's forgetful old man >> who would appear sympathetic to a jury. mr. hur chose not to bring charges mr. her, we think it's important that you'd be able to respond to president biden's response to your report. so we're going to play a short video of mr. biden's press cup. present biden's press conference after your report was released because there's things in this press conference at the president in state says that are directly contradicted by what you found in your port so if we can play that video

>> let me say a few things before i take your questions. as you know, the special counsel released his findings today about there, look into my handling of classified documents >> president biden, something that special counsel said in his report, is that one of the reasons you were not charged is because in his description, you are a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory >> i will mean i'm an elderly man and i know what the hell i'm doing when president and i put this country back on a sheet, i don't need his recommendation. he told >> is your memory. and can you continue as president? >> my memory is so bad. i let you speak that's has gotten worse >> my memory is not got my memory is fine my memory. take a look at what i've done since i've become president. none of you thought i could pass any of the things i got passed how that happened i guess i just

forgot what was going on >> it's a president and voters have concerns about your age. how are you just suisse and they do care that this report is only going fuel further concerns only by some of you >> today is you take responsibility for being careless with classified material? >> i take responsibility for not having seen exactly what my staff was doing there it goes in in 20 tau things that appear in my garage, things that came out of my home, things that were moved were moved not by me, but my staff but my staff >> president >> for months is when you were asked about your age, you would respond with the words, walked me. well, danny, american people have been watching and they have expressed concerns about your age they were judgment. that is your judgment

in public. there's not the judges over press expressed concerns about your mental acuity. they say that you were too old. mr. president, in december. you told me that you believe there are many other democrats who could defeat donald trump. so why does it have to be you now? >> what is your amazon >> first in this country, be present, united states, and finish the job i started thank you everyone >> i did not share classified information. i did not share it with your votes, right? with my ghostwrite did not guarantee you did not but council said it did not say that. >> okay. i'll be there by mr. president. what your question? >> the fact of the matter is what i didn't want repeated. i didn't want him to not i didn't read it to him. was i had written a long memorandum to president obama why we should not be in this in afghanistan. and i was a multiple pages and so what i

was referring to, i said classified, i should've said it was should be private because it was a contact between the president and vice president as to what was going on. that's what he's referring to. it was not classified information in that document. that was not crying >> he called on me. >> when you look back at this incident, is there anything you would do differently now, had do you think that a special prosecutor should have been appointed in the first place in both of these cases. >> first of all, what i would have done is oversee the transfer of the material that was in my office in my offices i should have done that. if i go back, i didn't have the responsibility. that was my staff was supposed to that and they referenced that in the report. and my staff did not do it in a way that, for example i

didn't know how half the boxes got in my garage until i found out staff gathering them up, put them together, and took them out of the garage of my home. and all the stuff that was in my home was in filing cabinets that were either locked or able to me like it was in my house. it wasn't out and like in mar lago in a public place where and none of it was high classified, didn't have any of that red stephan and you know what i mean around the corners. none of that >> so i wish >> i had paid more attention to how the documents were being moved to where i thought there would be moved to the archives. i thought all those be moved that's what i thought. now, what was the last part of your question whether a special counsel should have been appointed in this case and in the case of your rival present former press, i think a special counsel should have been appointed and the reason i think a special counsel should have been appointed is because i did not want to be in a position that they looked at trump and we're going to look at me just like they looked at the vice president. and the

fact is they made a firm conclusion. i did not break the law period. thank you all very negotiations >> i'm of the view, as you know, that the conduct of the response in gaza in the gaza strip has been over the top i think, that as you know initially the president of mexico sisi did not want to open up the gate to allow humanitarian material to get in

i talk to i convinced open the gate, led to make them part of the middle east and recognizing them fully in return for certain things that the united states would commit to do the commitment that we were proposed to do related to a 22 items. i'm not going to go in detail, but one of them was to deal with protection against their arch enemy to the northwest and northeast, i should say the second one by providing ammunition and material for them to defend themselves coincidentally that's the timeframe when this broke out. i have no proof when i'm about to say but it's not unreasonable suspect that the hamas understood what was about to take place and wanted to break it up before it happened >> a moment >> chair now recognizes the

ranking member, mr. nasma, for an opening statement >> chairman, i'm glad you have such information as he such admiration for the president that you allowed him to take the first ten minutes of this hearing? >> mr. chairman, >> house republicans may be desperate to convince america that white conservative men are on the losing end of a two-tiered justice system. a theory that appeals to the maga crowd that has no basis in reality. but your comments today made me wonder if you have read the special counsel's report at all? the hur report does help us draw distinction between president biden and donald trump. just not the one you want to distinctions actually. first, the report is clear that quote, at no point did the special counsel find evidence that mr. biden intended or had reason to believe the information will be used to injure the united states they said to benefit a foreign nation. close quote with respect to the classified documents found in president biden's possession, quote, the decision to decline criminal charges was straightforward,

close quote. and with respect to the special counsel's investigation, quote mr. biden turned in classified documents to the national archives and the department of justice consented to the search of multiple locations, including his homes sat for a voluntary interview, and in other ways, cooperated with the investigation. close quote president biden acted responsibly cooperating completely and the decision to decline criminal justice, to decline criminal >> charges was relatively straightforward. >> in >> short, to borrow a phrase from the last administration, the hur report represents the complete and total exoneration of president biden. and how does that record contrast with president trump the documents he retained and the criminal charges pending against him in florida we know that trump deliberately took large amounts of classified information from the white house. he has admitted as much occasionally pretending that he classified this information without telling anyone on his way out

the door. we know that he's store that information around mar-a-lago in the craziest of places on the ballroom stage, spilled across the floor of an unlocked closet next to the toilet we know that he showed classified military plans to an author interviewing him at bedminster, quote, as president, i could have declassified it. trump says on an audio recording. now i can't, you know, but this is still a secret. still a secret. close quote. so much for the declassification theory. we know from the indictment that trump is alleged to have shared these classified documents with many other visitors to mar-a-lago and we know that despite this outrageous conduct, the department of justice gave trump every opportunity to avoid criminal charges again, in the special counsel's words, quote, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution mr. trump allegedly did the opposite he not only refused to return the

documents for many months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it >> close quote why did the president charged former president trump, but not president biden not because of some vast conspiracy. not because the so-called deep state was out to get him, but because former president trump was fundamentally incapable of taking advantage of even one of the many, many chances he was given to avoid those charges which brings me to the second distinction, this report helps us draw between president biden and donald trump simply put, president biden had the mental acuity to navigate this situation. donald trump did not >> much has >> been made with a special counsel's gratuitous comments about the president biden's age. but let's set the context after attorning, every

classified document, after opening his home to federal investigators, while simultaneously managing the first hours of the crisis in israel. president biden volunteer to sit through a five-hour interview with the special counsel? i believe as is his habit, that president biden probably committed a verbal slip or two during the interview. and i'm not sure any of that matters because when the interview was over, mr. her completely exonerated president biden and then there is donald trump what kind of man bungles, not one, but dozens of opportunities to avoid criminal liability what does that say about his mental state? here to the record speaks for itself >> one of the great memories of all time, james webb, i don't remember the names they'll remember the name viktor orban. did anyone ever hear of him? he's the leader of turkey, by the way, they never report the

crowd on january 6, you know, nikki haley. nikki haley is in charge of security three years. lady ladies ledi cow about that. >> did you actually have a one-on-one with comey and not much not even that i remember >> i proceed. >> we have languages coming into our country. we have nobody that even speaks those languages. they truly foreign languages. nobody speaks them. thought gray, and russia will repeat >> i have a really good memory. >> you are next wife was a woman by the name of marla maples right. do you recall what years you were married to ms naples? >> it's called like up here and it's called memory at his gold, other things. so you don't >> remember saying you have one of the best one? >> i don't remember that. >> putin, you know, i saw a little respect for obama that he's starting to throw around the nuclear war terror you've heard that nuclear, we have to win november. we're not going to have pennsylvania. >> they'll change the name. >> i talked to putin a lot

>> sorry for did you ask him that? >> i don't remember that. i saw that this morning. i don't remember asking him. did have a good memory and all that stuff, like a great memory, short 20 years that we're fighting isis i defeated isis in four weeks and we did with obama. we wanted election that everyone said couldn't be won them that cag divisively. >> and you know what? well, i am you're getting choice, you going to be the first flip i know mike people you say, all right, trump. you did a good job get the hell out of here. that said that is a man who is incapable of avoiding criminal liability. a man who is wholly unfit for office and who a man and a man who at the very least, or to think twice before accusing others of cognitive decline? thank you for being here today, mr. her thank you for illuminating a stark choice for this country in the most, in the months to come. i look forward to your testimony. now,

yield back tell me yields back. chair now recognizes the chairman of the oversight committee, mr. comer, for an opening statement. >> thank you. >> in >> august 2022, president biden questioned in a 60 minutes interview how anyone can be that irresponsible when asked about classified documents in the possession of former president trump but when president biden said this, he knew that he had stashed classified materials in several unsecured locations for years dating back to his time as vice president and even as a us senator president biden, the white house and his personal attorneys have not been honest with the american people about his wolf will retention of classified material and continue to hide information from congress. president biden's attorneys claim to a first discovered classified material at penn biden center on november 2, 2022 however, president biden and his lawyers keep it secret from the american people before the midterm elections, cbs news broke the story in january

2023, leaving americans to wonder if the white house had any intention of ever disclosing that president biden hoarded classified documents for years. one of my first actions after becoming chairman of the house oversight committee was to launch an investigation into president biden's mishandling of classified documents this investigation started before special counsel her was named and what we found is alarming information obtained through multiple transcribed interviews conducted by the oversight committee contradict the white house is and president biden's personal attorneys narrative about the discovery of classified documents commits at the penn biden center. in fact, the real timeline began in the spring of 2021 not november 2022, as the white house claimed. additionally, the classified documents were not kept in a locked closet as asserted by the white house we've also learned at five white house employees and a department of defense employee were involved in the early

stages of coordinating the organizing, moving, and removing a boxes that were later found to contain classified materials. there's no reasonable explanation as to why so many white house employees were concerned with retrieving boxes. they believed one it contained personal documents and materials. why did president biden keep these specific documents in unsecure locations for years? many questions remain, but now the white house is obstructing congress as we seek the truth for the american people we've subpoenaed former white house counsel, dana remus to appear for a deposition to provide information to our committee. but the white house is seeking to block her testimony we've also subpoenaed the department of justice for audio recordings and transcript of president biden's interview with special counsel, her. these were due the morning of the state of the union only this morning. a couple of hours before today's hearing, the department of justice finally, provided the transcript of president biden's interview with special counsel her. the timing is not

coincidental. although we've had little time to review the transcripts from what we have seen. it is clear that the white house did not want special counsel hur's final report before to be released. the white house has refused to be transparent with the american people about the president's mishandling of classified documents and worse, they have appeared to have lied about the timeline about who handled the documents and even about the contents of president biden's interview with special counsel her that is why today's hearing is important. transparencies, what we seek today and we look forward to special counsel hur's testimony. you'll >> boat gentleman yields back the chair now recognizes the ranking member of the oversight committee, mr. raskin, for his opening statement. >> thank you, chairman. jordan. they're just three basic points that all americans need to understand. about mr. hur's report. number one, the special counsel exonerates president biden, the very first line of the report says at all, quote, we conclude that no criminal

charges are warranted in this matter. we would reach the same conclusion, even if department of justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges it's against a sitting president second, the report establishes that president biden offered complete and on hesitating cooperation with the special counsel's investigation. the justice department, the national archives were proactively notified. the classified documents and they were turned over. the president allowed the fbi to search his homes. and he's sat for a voluntary interview for more than five hours on october 8th and october 9th even as he was busy responding to hamas is vicious terrorist attack in israel. the report thus demonstrates president biden's complete devotion to the rule of law and his respect for a fair and independent department of justice. president biden did not assert executive privilege or claim absolute immunity for presidential crimes. he did not hide boxes of documents under his bed or in a bathtub. he did

not fight investigators nor did he seek to redact a single word of mr. hur's report. he consented to the search of numerous locations, including in his holmes, and he did everything he could to cooperate, not obstruct. third, special counsel, her repeatedly emphasizes that president biden's conduct contrast sharply with that of former president trump. her observes that unlike president biden, quote the allegation set forth in the indictment of mr. trump, if proven, would clearly establish not only mr. trump's willfulness, but also serious aggravating factors. he sets forth these points of difference in detail, quote, most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, trump allegedly did the opposite. according to the indictment, he not only refused to return the documents for months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence. and

then to lie about it. unquote. he returned only a portion of subpoena documents and deliberately withheld arrest. unlike president biden, trump did not not alert the national archives or doj of the documents, nor did he turn over all the classified materials in his possession. he did not agree to sit down for a voluntary interview with the special counsel. he never consented to a search of his home on the contrary, trump suggested that his attorney hide or destroy evidence required quested by the fbi in the grand jury, trump carefully instructed his aide to move boxes of classified documents to hide them from the fbi. trump tried to delete incriminating security tape footage from mar-a-lago, and he got his attorney to provide a false certification to the fbi saying he had produced all the documents in his possession. he did not, given that this report is so damning in the contrast between biden and trump, it is hard for me to see why our colleagues think that this

hearing advances their flailing and embarrassing quest to impeach the president of the united states what america sees today is evidence of one president who believes in the rule of law and works to protect it, and one who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law and acts totally in pursuit of his own constantly multiplying corrupt schemes. i yield back gentleman yields back without objection. all other opening statements will be included in the record. we will now introduce today's witness, the honorable robert hur was appointed as special counsel in january 2023 to investigate the removal and retention of classified documents discovered at the penn biden center for diplomacy and global engagement. he previously served as the principal associate death deputy attorney general at the department of justice. and as the united states attorney for the district of maryland, he was a law clerk for chief justice william rehnquist, and also clerked for judge alex kaczynski on the ninth circuit court of appeals. we welcome our witness and thank him for appearing today. we will begin by swearing you in, mr. her, would you please stand? raise your right hand do you swear or

affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief so help you god? the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. thank you. and you can be seen please know that your written testimony will be entered into the record in its entirety accordingly, we ask that you summarize your testimony. mr. hurt, you you may begin with your opening statement make sure you've got to make sure you get that michael. and if you could, mr. hurd. thank you. thank you, chairman >> chairman. jordan, ranking member, nadler. chairman. comer ranking member, raskin, members of the committee. good morning. i'm privileged to have served our country for the majority of my career, a decade and a half. most of those years with the department of justice, i have served as a line prosecutor, a supervisor. the principal associate, deputy attorney general a united states attorney, and a special counsel i've served in these roles

with gratitude as the son of immigrants to this country. the first member of my family to be born here my parents grew up in korea and were young children during the korean war. my father remembers being hungry and grateful for the food that american gis shared with him and his siblings my mother fled what is now north korea in her own mother's arms, heading south to safety my parents eventually met, married, and came to the us seeking a better life for themselves and for their children. their lives and mine would have been very different were it not for this country no matter the role no matter the administration, i have applied the same standards and the same impartiality my respect for the justice department and my commitment to this country, or why i agreed to serve as special counsel when asked by the attorney general, i resolved to do the work because i did all my work for the department fairly

orally and professionally with close attention to the policies and practices that govern department prosecutor my team and i conducted a thorough, independent investigation we identified evidence that the president willfully retained classified materials after the end of his vice presidency when he was a private citizen this evidence included an audio recorded conversation during which during which mr. biden told his ghostwriter that he had, quote, just found all the classified stuff downstairs, end quote when mr. biden said this, he was a private citizen speaking to his ghostwriter in his private rental home in virginia. we also identified other recorded conversations during which mr. biden read classified information, allowed to his ghostwriter we did not, however, identify evidence that rose to the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence fell short of that standard. i declined to recommend criminal charges against mr. biden the

department's regulations required me to write a confidential report explaining my decision to the attorney general. i understood that my explanation about this case had to include rigorous, detailed, and thorough analysis. in other words, i needed to show my work just as i would expect, any prosecutor to show his or her work explaining the decision to prosecute or not the need to, show my work was especially strong here. the attorney general had pointed me to investigate the actions of the attorney general's boss, the sitting president of united states i knew that from my decision to be credible, i could not simply announce that i recommended no criminal charges and leave it at that. i needed to explain why my report reflects my best effort to explain why i declined to recommend charging president biden i analyze the evidence as prosecutors routinely do by assessing its strengths and

weaknesses, including by anticipating the ways in which the president's defense lawyers might poke holes in the government's case if there were a trial and seek to persuade jurors that the government could not prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt there has been a lot of attention paid to language in the report about the president's memory. so let me say a few words about fat my task was to determine whether the president retained or disclosed national defense information willfully that means knowingly and with the intent to do something, the law forbids i could not make that determination without assessing the president's state of mind for that reason, i had to consider the president's memory and overall mental state and how a jury likely would perceive his memory and mental state in a criminal trial? these are the types of issues that prosecutors analyze every day and because these issues were important to my ultimate decision i had to include a discussion of them in my report to the attorney general the

evidence and the president himself put his memory squarely at issue we interviewed the president and asked him about his recorded statement, quote, i just found all the classified stuff downstairs and quote he told us that he didn't remember saying that to his ghostwriter. he also said he didn't remember finding any classified material in his home after his vice presidency and he didn't remember anything about how classified documents about afghanistan made their way into his garage my assessment and the report about the relevance of the president's memory was necessary. >> an >> accurate and fair most importantly what i wrote is what i believe the evidence shows and what i expect jurors would perceive and believe i did not sanitize my explanation nor did i disparage the president unfairly. i explained to the attorney general by decision and the reasons for it that's what i was required to do i took the same approach

when i compared the evidence regarding president biden to the department's allegations against former president trump there, too. i called it like i saw it as a prosecutor. i had to consider relevant precedents and to explain why different facts justify different outcomes. that is what i did in my report. i'm confident the analysis set forth in chapters 1,112.13 of my report provides a thorough evaluation and explanation of the evidence, and i encourage everyone to read it to inform their opinions of the report prosecutors rarely write public reports are testify about their investigations that is, the justice department's longstanding policy, and it protects important interests my team and i prepared the report to the attorney general with care and the report stands as the primary source of information. my responses today will be limited to clarifying information for the committee i will refrain from speculating or commenting on areas outside

the scope of the investigation, nor will i discuss what investigative steps we did or did not take beyond what's in the report in conclusion, i want to express my heartfelt thanks to the attorney's agents analysts, and professional staff, who helped us do our work fairly thoroughly. and independently. i am grateful and privileged to serve with them. i single out for particular thanks deputy special counsel and more crick mom a former united states attorney himself, who brought great wisdom, skill, and judgment to our task. thank you. i welcome your questions. >> thank you, mr. heard, the chair now recognizes the gentleman from north dakota for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman how could that possibly happen? how could anyone be that irresponsible? and i thought what data was in there that could compromise sources, methods and it's just totally irresponsible as president biden's statement about donald trump and the classified documents, and mr. her

classified documents were found at the penn biden center? that's correct. >> they were found in >> president biden's garage in wilmington, delaware? yes. and in his basement den also in the same home? yes. in the major and his main for office? >> correct. and his third floor dan? >> correct. >> at the university of delaware >> correct. and at the biden institute correct. and the elements of the crime for this i mean, we get into all of this, but the elements of the crime are pretty simple, right? the present or president biden had unauthorized possession of a document writing or no, that's correct. >> correct. >> and that the document writing or no. related to national defense correct? that the defendant and we may talk about the willfully part here in a second. retain the document, writing our note and failed to deliver it to an employee or officer entitled to receive it, >> correct? there is a willfulness intent element, as you say, and but those are the elements of the crime including? the intent element? yes. and there are at least two different quotes right? where he told his gross writer. and

this is in your report in a matter of fact, and this is february 16, 2017, that he had just found all this classified stuff downstairs. >> he did make that statement that was captured on an audio recording on april 10, 2017, biden read aloud a classified passage related to a 2015 meeting in the situation room that is in the report? yes. and these are national security documents afghanistan has been mentioned a whole bunch of those things, right? correct. >> and at one point in time, his personal attorneys in the doj attorneys argued about notes taking all of the different things, and compared it to reagan. >> i'm sorry. could you repeat that, congressman? >> president biden's attorneys, personal attorneys talked about the notes and why they didn't actually account for the presidential records act. but you i mean, you found that aren't have you meant in your report? it seems a little persuasive, but you eventually said no, the executive order, trump's right >> we did conduct we did set forth and analysis of the governing law and ultimately

concluded that the executive order, 135 to six does apply. and did govern former vice president biden at the time. >> so you have audio recording from his ghostwriter where the president acknowledges that the information he has his classified and he's sharing with his ghostwriter. >> we have an audio recording capturing a statement from mr. biden saying to his ghostwriter in february of 2017, quote, i just found all the classified stuff downstairs and quote and then again, reciting passages from a meeting in the situation. >> yes. and those are in president biden's own words, correct? right. so he's in the ghostwriter has no classified no. he has no clearance, no classified clearance to anything, correct? that is >> our understanding that mr. zwonitzer was not authorized to receive classified information. >> okay. so the elements are possessed documents. the documents related to national defense and willfully retain those documents. and in this case shared them with somebody

who was not allowed to receive them. >> there. are different subsections of 18 usc 793e. one subsection relates to the willful retention and another relates to disclosure of national defense information. >> well, i mean, the willful retention we've got the penn biden center of the garage, the basement den, the main floor office, the third floor, dan, the university of delaware, and the biden is we have 50 year career of a person who has not been very great at dealing with classified documents throughout even prior to his time as vice president when he was in the us senate, right? >> we do address each set of those documents in the report, congressman. >> so the difference, but i think this is really important because the difference is it appears just from reading the report he is we heard all about exonerated and all those different things it appears from the report he met every actual element of the crime. so i want to talk about the department principles on federal prosecution, because that actually has nothing to do with the underlying elements, correct? it's whether or not you can prove this at trial

under the department's justice manual and the principles of federal prosecution, a prosecutor has to assess the evidence and determine whether in his or her >> judgment the likely of the probable outcome will be a conviction at trial. >> so whether or not you meet the elements of the crime, which i think it's clear that he does. the second part of this is this and that's where gets into the sympathetic well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory, you could have just said, we don't prosecute a sitting president's, but you did not and you entered this. but that doesn't have anything to do what they actual elements of the crime that has to do with getting a conviction at trial, correct? >> well, congressman part and parcel of a prosecutors judgment as to whether or not a conviction is the probable outcome of trial is assessing how the evidence identified during the investigation lines up with the elements and what proof can be offered to a jury during a trial. >> sure. but his well-meaning elderly man has nothing to do with the underlying elements well, it certainly has presentation to the jury. it's certainly has something back. >> tell me can respond.

>> it's certainly has something to do with the way that a jury is going to perceive and receive and consider and conclude, make conclusions based on evidence at trial. congress time the gentleman's expired the chair now recognizes the ranking member of the judiciary committee, mr. nauta. >> thank you >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. her, in your written testimony, you say that you've found some evidence that the president might have willfully retained classified materials at the end of his vice presidency, correct? correct. >> but ultimately, you've included that you could not prove the charge in a court of law in your words, you quote, did not identify evidence that rose to the level of proof down to reasonable doubt. close quote correct? >> that was my judgment. >> you have been a prosecuted for a long time, is to her. >> would >> you agree that there is no such thing as being a little bit charged for a crime. you're either charged or you're not, correct? >> could you please repeat the question, congressman, would you agree that there's no such thing as being a little bit charged for a crime. you're either charged or you are not charged, correct? >> yes, it is binary. either one is not shrinking or char

just to be clear, because so many people have taken your words out of context. your ultimate conclusion was that president biden could not be charged with a crime because even after your thorough investigation, you could not find sufficient evidence to charge him, correct? >> my conclusion was that based on my evaluation of the evidence as i don't fueled by its correct. >> i'm sorry, >> congressman didn't hear last question. >> i said, based on your conclusion, your ultimate conclusions that president biden could not be charged with a crime because even after your thorough investigation, you could not find sufficient evidence to charge him correctly? we're not correct. >> my ultimate conclusion was that criminal charges were not warranted, correct >> now, let's talk about why i have limited time, so please, when i say correct or not correct, answer the question now let's talk about why in sharp contrast to president biden, president trump faces 40 charges related to the unlawful retention of highly classified documents that is of course, apart from the additional 51 counts in cases alleging that he incited a rebellion and lied

about his finances. you found that president biden reported the possible classified documents in his possession to the fbi. as soon as he learned to them, correct? >> there was a voluntary disclosure by the president pence counsel to authorities relating to the discovery of classified documents at the slide. >> let's contrast this with president trump. >> are >> you aware that the fbi only learned that trump was in possession of classified material after the national archives discovered them. >> congressman, i am not intimately familiar with the facts relating to former president trump. i'm prepared to comment on them to the extent that i addressed them. >> report you write in your report that president biden, quote, would not have handed the government classified documents from his own home on a silver platter. if he had willfully retained those documents for years, close quote in other words, part of understanding president biden's intent was that he quickly in voluntarily returned those documents to the government, correct? >> that was a factor in our analysis, yes. thank you. >> by way of contrast to the best acknowledge, why did the

department of justice seek a warrant to search mar-a-lago congressman, i am not familiar with those deliberations. that is a matter that i had no participant. >> well, i'll tell you it was because they were concerned that trump had lied about possession those documents, and might conceal or destroy them special counsel smith found that president trump obstructed his investigation by suggesting that his attorney false represent to the fbi and grand jury that trump did not have the documents called for by the grand jury subpoena at any point in your investigation? you do have any reason to believe that president biden lied to you i do >> address in my report one response to the president gave to a question that we opposed to them that we deem to be not credible. >> what is it clear he didn't lie. >> i'm sorry, congressman. >> the report is clear that he didn't lie or that he caused the staff to it and that he didn't cause a staff-wide to your report is clear on that. you agree that causing someone to lie to the fbi is a classic example of obstruction of

justice. >> it is an example of obstruction, yes. >> thank you. trump also obstructed the smith investigation by directing one of his employees to move boxes of documents to conceal them from trump's attorney from the fbi and from the grand jury at any point in your investigation, did you find that president biden directed his staff to conceal documents from you or anyone else? >> we did not reach that. >> you would agree that hiding documents is a classic example of obstructing an investigation? >> it is an example of >> donald trump instructed his staff to delete security footage that the fbi and special counsel could not see how we had tried to move in hide documents. do you agree that attempting to delete video footage in this manner is plainly an attempted to obstruct an investigation congressman, i don't want to characterize the evidence in the case against women, but if that happened, would you agree that the leading video footage is plainly an >> attempt to obstruct an investigation. >> congressman, it's the type of evidence that prosecutors wouldn't consider sum up

donald trump is charged with willfully retaining classified documents and conspiring to conceal those documents. and he's facing additional charges for lying to investigators. isn't that correct? >> those are allegations that are in a public. former president trump. >> and the reason why president biden is not facing a single charge, mr. her is not because you went easy on him, but because after reviewing 7 million documents and interviewing nearly 150 witnesses, including the president himself you could not prove that he had committed a crime. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back the gentleman from mr. mcclintock from california is recognized >> thank you, mr. her. i first want to get this straight. >> is it now? okay. if i take home top secret documents store them in my garage and read portions of them to friends or associates congressman i wouldn't? recommend it, but i don't want to entertain any hypotheticals that this was it. >> okay. i mean, i can do that now under this new doctrine.

>> again, congressman, i wouldn't recommend that you do that, but you've you've essentially said so in your report? and certainly it would be exculpatory if i if i simply told you, hey, i'm getting hold. i don't remember stuff the way i used to >> congressman, i'm not here to get into hypotheticals. i'm here to talk about the facts and the work that i did. it was not a hypothetical. this is the issue at hand. you correctly noted in your report that former presidents and other senior officials had been given wide latitude in their possession of classified information and i believe your decision not to prosecute biden for the same offense is consistent with that precedent, but the problem is that precedent changed with the administration's decision to prosecute donald trump and the irony is that as president trump had full discretion over handling classified material and full discretion in deciding which records to retain as a

senator or vice president, joe biden didn't have that. so now we get to this glaring double standard. i think it would be toxic to the rule of law on its face if it was just to ordinary citizens. >> but the fact that the >> only person being prosecuted for this offense happens to be the president's political opponent makes this an unprecedented assault on our democracy. >> this is >> the worst we could expect from a banana republic. and i wonder how you square this congressman, i do address as i was required to as a prosecutor, a relevant precedent in the form of the alleged >> the allegations in the indictment against former president trump. i set forth my explanation in my assessment and comparison to those precedents in my report, and i am not here to comment any further be said, for example, that there was no evidence beyond reasonable doubt. well, you've got the fact that he had classified material in his

possession and control in multiple settings for multiple years that he told others he was aware of this and that he shared that material with others. the mind boggles at what beyond reasonable doubt would actually mean? >> well, as i set forth at length in my explanations in chapters 11.12 over the report, my assessment is that the evidence, if presented at trial alongside potential defense arguments would not probably result in a conviction as well. >> that's one of the points you make is president biden's likely to be in la well, to really sympathetic figure with a poor memory. but how does that bear on any individual's guilt or innocence? isn't that again, a question for a judge or jury to decide after guilt or innocence is determined and again, here's the problem. donald trump's being prosecuted for exactly the same act that you've documented that joe biden committed. >> congressman if i understood your question correctly, you

said isn't that a question for a jury at it most certainly in the through the lens of my my question is, does that bear on the guilt or innocence of an individual? >> it certainly bears on how a jury is going to receive and perceive and make decisions. >> the answer to my earlier question is correct. all i have to do when i'm caught taking home classified materials to say i'm sorry, mr. herbert, but i'm getting old. my memory is not so great. >> congressman. >> this is the doctrine that you've established in our laws now and it's frightening >> congress in my intent is certainly not to establish any sort of doctrine. i had a particular task. i have a particular set of evidence to consider and make a judgment with respect to one particular set of evidence. and that is what i did. >> well, mr. her hears here's the fine point of the matter. the foundation of our justice system is equal justice under law that's what give the law. it's respect and its legitimacy and without it, the law is simply force devoid of

any moral authority justice is depicted as blindfolded for, for this very reason, it doesn't matter who comes before her all are treated equally is destroyed this foundation and the rule of law becomes a sick mockery. it becomes a weapon to wield against political rivals and a tool of despotism and i'm desperately afraid that this decision of the department of justice is now crossed. a very bright line and you'll back telling yields >> back is presented with consent introduce the state of the union as it the hearing without objection. that'll be introduced. the ranking members recognized for unanimous consent. mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i ask you and i'm just gonna send that a copy of an article in this morning is the washington post entitled to full transcript of biden's special counsel interview paints nuanced portrait. the president's the president doesn't come across as

absent-minded is herb has made them out to be without objection. thank you. chair. recognizes now recognizes gentleman from california for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you. mr. hur for being here today. i found your report very interesting and i learned some things about it. >> the >> law and the precedents. there are clear differences between the cases of an precedents sat by president reagan a trump, and biden out it was widely known that president reagan kept diaries from his presidency that included classified information. what i didn't know and learned in your report was that the department of justice, quote, repeatedly described the diaries and public court filings as mr. reagan's personal records on quote, and that no agency ever attempted to remove his diaries. that's on page 195 of your report? very interesting. so the

investigation found that president biden believed that his notebooks where his personal property including work and political notes, reflections to do less and more that he was entitled to take home. you found that on page 232 so while much of his notebook was work-related, he still had some purely personal subjects like, again, i quote, gut wrenching entities about the illness and death of his son, beau and that's on page 82.2 53 of your report. so it's clear based on the reagan precedent that no criminal charges were awarded in this matter relative to personal notebooks now, i want to be clear that although the notebooks contain some very personal information and president biden consider them his personal property. the president allowed your team to

seize and review all of the notebooks you found. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> now, that's in stark contrast to x president trump's case he obstructed and diverted all the investigations now, you also interviewed president biden about other classified documents you found outside his notebooks, didn't you? >> yes congresswoman >> so did the president tell you that he believed any documents other than his own handwritten work where his personal property yes or no? >> we did not hear that from the president during his interview. >> so again, it's very different from x president trump, ex-president trump said all of the documents marked classified were his personal property president biden did not consider documents that were produced by other entities with classification markings as his personal records. now i think since the majority is tried to assert that there is a

disparity based on politics in the differences in the prosecution. it's worth quoting page 11 of the report which says and i quote, several material distinctions between mr. trump's case and mr. biden's case are clear most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, mr. trump allegedly did the opposite. according to the indictment, he not only refused to return the documents for many months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it. that's on page 11. vote in contrast, mr. biden turned in classified documents to the national archives and the department of justice consented to the search of multiple locations, including his homes, sat for a voluntary interview, and in other ways, cooperated with the investigation. it's

clear that these cases are not the same and frankly, i was surprised to learn that some of the classified documents were actually personal diaries that many executive officials have have taken home with them because it was in their own handwriting. it was what they produced and based on the department of justice public statements during the reagan administration, it is understandable that a person could believe that their personal diaries that they produced or not to be turned over just as president reagan did not turn them over. so i appreciate your report. i appreciate your being here, mr. her, and i would also like to ask mr. chairman, a unanimous request to include in the record a september 11 letter from the special counsel to the president to special